Background: This study aimed to investigate the prevalence, management, and comorbidities of diabetes mellitus among Korean adults. Methods: Data from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2019–2022) were analyzed to assess the prevalence, treatment, risk factors, and comorbidities of diabetes. Comparisons between young and older adults with diabetes were emphasized. Results: Among Korean adults aged ≥30 years, the prevalence of diabetes is 15.5% during 2021–2022. Of these, 74.7% were aware of their condition, 70.9% received antidiabetic treatment, and only 32.4% achieved glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) <6.5%. Moreover, 15.9% met the integrated management targets, which included HbA1c <6.5%, blood pressure <140/85 mm Hg, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <100 mg/dL. In young adults aged 19 to 39 years, the prevalence of diabetes was 2.2%. Among them, 43.3% were aware of their condition, 34.6% received treatment, and 29.6% achieved HbA1c <6.5%. Obesity affected 87.1%, and 26.9% had both hypertension and hypercholesterolemia. Among adults aged ≥65 years, the prevalence of diabetes was 29.3%, with awareness, treatment, and control rates of 78.8%, 75.7%, and 31.2%, respectively. Integrated management targets (HbA1c <7.5%, hypertension, and lipids) were achieved by 40.1%. Conclusion Diabetes mellitus remains highly prevalent among Korean adults, with significant gaps in integrated glycemic, blood pressure, and lipid control. Older adults with diabetes show higher awareness and treatment rates but limited integrated management outcomes. Young adults with diabetes bear a significant burden of obesity and comorbidities, alongside low awareness and treatment rates. Therefore, early intervention programs, education, and strategies tailored to younger populations are urgently required.

Background: This study aimed to investigate the prevalence, management, and comorbidities of diabetes mellitus among Korean adults. Methods: Data from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2019–2022) were analyzed to assess the prevalence, treatment, risk factors, and comorbidities of diabetes. Comparisons between young and older adults with diabetes were emphasized. Results: Among Korean adults aged ≥30 years, the prevalence of diabetes is 15.5% during 2021–2022. Of these, 74.7% were aware of their condition, 70.9% received antidiabetic treatment, and only 32.4% achieved glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) <6.5%. Moreover, 15.9% met the integrated management targets, which included HbA1c <6.5%, blood pressure <140/85 mm Hg, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <100 mg/dL. In young adults aged 19 to 39 years, the prevalence of diabetes was 2.2%. Among them, 43.3% were aware of their condition, 34.6% received treatment, and 29.6% achieved HbA1c <6.5%. Obesity affected 87.1%, and 26.9% had both hypertension and hypercholesterolemia. Among adults aged ≥65 years, the prevalence of diabetes was 29.3%, with awareness, treatment, and control rates of 78.8%, 75.7%, and 31.2%, respectively. Integrated management targets (HbA1c <7.5%, hypertension, and lipids) were achieved by 40.1%. Conclusion Diabetes mellitus remains highly prevalent among Korean adults, with significant gaps in integrated glycemic, blood pressure, and lipid control. Older adults with diabetes show higher awareness and treatment rates but limited integrated management outcomes. Young adults with diabetes bear a significant burden of obesity and comorbidities, alongside low awareness and treatment rates. Therefore, early intervention programs, education, and strategies tailored to younger populations are urgently required.

Background: This study aimed to investigate the prevalence, management, and comorbidities of diabetes mellitus among Korean adults. Methods: Data from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2019–2022) were analyzed to assess the prevalence, treatment, risk factors, and comorbidities of diabetes. Comparisons between young and older adults with diabetes were emphasized. Results: Among Korean adults aged ≥30 years, the prevalence of diabetes is 15.5% during 2021–2022. Of these, 74.7% were aware of their condition, 70.9% received antidiabetic treatment, and only 32.4% achieved glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) <6.5%. Moreover, 15.9% met the integrated management targets, which included HbA1c <6.5%, blood pressure <140/85 mm Hg, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <100 mg/dL. In young adults aged 19 to 39 years, the prevalence of diabetes was 2.2%. Among them, 43.3% were aware of their condition, 34.6% received treatment, and 29.6% achieved HbA1c <6.5%. Obesity affected 87.1%, and 26.9% had both hypertension and hypercholesterolemia. Among adults aged ≥65 years, the prevalence of diabetes was 29.3%, with awareness, treatment, and control rates of 78.8%, 75.7%, and 31.2%, respectively. Integrated management targets (HbA1c <7.5%, hypertension, and lipids) were achieved by 40.1%. Conclusion Diabetes mellitus remains highly prevalent among Korean adults, with significant gaps in integrated glycemic, blood pressure, and lipid control. Older adults with diabetes show higher awareness and treatment rates but limited integrated management outcomes. Young adults with diabetes bear a significant burden of obesity and comorbidities, alongside low awareness and treatment rates. Therefore, early intervention programs, education, and strategies tailored to younger populations are urgently required.

Background: This study aimed to investigate the prevalence, management, and comorbidities of diabetes mellitus among Korean adults. Methods: Data from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2019–2022) were analyzed to assess the prevalence, treatment, risk factors, and comorbidities of diabetes. Comparisons between young and older adults with diabetes were emphasized. Results: Among Korean adults aged ≥30 years, the prevalence of diabetes is 15.5% during 2021–2022. Of these, 74.7% were aware of their condition, 70.9% received antidiabetic treatment, and only 32.4% achieved glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) <6.5%. Moreover, 15.9% met the integrated management targets, which included HbA1c <6.5%, blood pressure <140/85 mm Hg, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <100 mg/dL. In young adults aged 19 to 39 years, the prevalence of diabetes was 2.2%. Among them, 43.3% were aware of their condition, 34.6% received treatment, and 29.6% achieved HbA1c <6.5%. Obesity affected 87.1%, and 26.9% had both hypertension and hypercholesterolemia. Among adults aged ≥65 years, the prevalence of diabetes was 29.3%, with awareness, treatment, and control rates of 78.8%, 75.7%, and 31.2%, respectively. Integrated management targets (HbA1c <7.5%, hypertension, and lipids) were achieved by 40.1%. Conclusion Diabetes mellitus remains highly prevalent among Korean adults, with significant gaps in integrated glycemic, blood pressure, and lipid control. Older adults with diabetes show higher awareness and treatment rates but limited integrated management outcomes. Young adults with diabetes bear a significant burden of obesity and comorbidities, alongside low awareness and treatment rates. Therefore, early intervention programs, education, and strategies tailored to younger populations are urgently required.

Background/Aims: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) play a crucial role in managing laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), but the optimal dosing regimen remains unclear. We aim to compare the effectiveness of the same total PPI dose administered twice daily versus once daily in LPR patients. Methods: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial at a tertiary referral hospital, enrolling a total of 132 patients aged 19 to 79 with LPR. These patients were randomly assigned to receive either a 10 mg twice daily (BID) or a 20 mg once daily (QD) dose of ilaprazole for 12 weeks. The Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) and Reflux Finding Score (RFS) were assessed at 8 weeks and 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was the RSI response, defined as a reduction of 50% or more in the total RSI score from baseline. We also analyzed the efficacy of the dosing regimens and the impact of dosing and duration on treatment outcomes. Results: The BID group did not display a higher response rate for RSI than the QD group. The changes in total RSI scores at the 8-week and 16-week visits showed no significant differences between the 2 groups. Total RFS alterations were also comparable between both groups.Each dosing regimen demonstrated significant decreases in RSI and RFS. Conclusions Both BID and QD PPI dosing regimens improved subjective symptom scores and objective laryngoscopic findings. There was no significant difference in RSI improvement between the 2 dosing regimens, indicating that either dosing regimen could be considered a viable treatment option.

Background/Aims: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) play a crucial role in managing laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), but the optimal dosing regimen remains unclear. We aim to compare the effectiveness of the same total PPI dose administered twice daily versus once daily in LPR patients. Methods: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial at a tertiary referral hospital, enrolling a total of 132 patients aged 19 to 79 with LPR. These patients were randomly assigned to receive either a 10 mg twice daily (BID) or a 20 mg once daily (QD) dose of ilaprazole for 12 weeks. The Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) and Reflux Finding Score (RFS) were assessed at 8 weeks and 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was the RSI response, defined as a reduction of 50% or more in the total RSI score from baseline. We also analyzed the efficacy of the dosing regimens and the impact of dosing and duration on treatment outcomes. Results: The BID group did not display a higher response rate for RSI than the QD group. The changes in total RSI scores at the 8-week and 16-week visits showed no significant differences between the 2 groups. Total RFS alterations were also comparable between both groups.Each dosing regimen demonstrated significant decreases in RSI and RFS. Conclusions Both BID and QD PPI dosing regimens improved subjective symptom scores and objective laryngoscopic findings. There was no significant difference in RSI improvement between the 2 dosing regimens, indicating that either dosing regimen could be considered a viable treatment option.